> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: Joe Orton [
>
> Thanks for doing the research, Roy.
Yep, thanks from me too.
>
> On Wed, Jun 07, 2006 at 02:03:33PM -0700, Roy T. Fielding wrote:
> > Okay, let me put it in a different way. The alternatives are
> >
> > 1) retain the status quo, forbid distributing ssl binaries, and
> > include in our documentation that people in banned
> countries are not
> > allowed to download httpd 2.x.
>
> This gets my vote. I don't see why it's necessary for the
> ASF to be in
> the business of distributing binaries; letting other people
> assume the
> technical and legal responsibilites for doing that seems reasonable.
>
> The documentation work necessary would be greater if mod_ssl is split
> into a separate package, and having mod_ssl in the tree is one of the
> compelling features of 2.x anyway.
Provided that we do not find a solution that allows us to keep mod_ssl inside
the httpd tree (having an additional non ssl source tar ball that has the
modules/ssl directory removed during rolling the package seems to be
acceptable to me (not knowing if this would solve our legal pains))
I agree with Joe.
Regards
Rüdiger